Vikings/Packers not on telly...

...:eek:

Or at least not on Sky or Five.

Seems pretty stupid. I would have thought this game should be shown anyway given the rivalry, the Favre issue makes it compelling.

Oat23

It's a Monday Night Football game. MNF not on TV over here so no Vikings - Packers..

Nobody is going to show it just because of the whole Brett Favre thing. I'm looking forward to his return to Lameblow more to be honest.

Max Power1

grr i know.. this new tv rights deal is the gayest thing ever! :mad: Now i wont get to see No4 suit up against the pack!

tallaghtoutlaws

Max Power1 wrote: »

grr i know.. this new tv rights deal is the gayest thing ever! :mad: Now i wont get to see No4 suit up against the pack!

Plenty of streams online

Max Power1

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Plenty of streams online

aye

but not the same as watching in near HD picture quality on my widescreen TV (a priviliege i pay enough for the sky sports pack to watch)

tallaghtoutlaws

Max Power1 wrote: »

aye

but not the same as watching in near HD picture quality on my widescreen TV (a priviliege i pay enough for the sky sports pack to watch)

Seriously though why do people keep saying it as its their right becuase they subscribe to sky that they should have all the games? You pay Sky for a HD service not for the NFL games whether you choose to watch other HD sports or not.

I truly think its sad that people have gotton so used to the quality programming and now its gone feel its their rights messed with. Sky are a business and owe us nothing at the end of it. If they felt the Sunday and Monday games were costing them too much they will pull it. Or maybe something else got in their way who knows but at the end of it lets all get of our high horses and stop pretending for one minute sky or the nfl owe us anything.

We truly didnt know how lucky we were with the NFL coverage until it was taken away from us.

Disclaimer: Not aimed at you personally Max but all this Sky owes us bollocks really annoys me. If everyone pulled their contracts with Sky tomorrow and gave the NFL as their reason for doing it maybe then they would take note. But no one has as yet again us and the Brits prove how good we are at moaning about something and not doing anything about it.

themont85

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Seriously though why do people keep saying it as its their right becuase they subscribe to sky that they should have all the games? You pay Sky for a HD service not for the NFL games whether you choose to watch other HD sports or not.

I truly think its sad that people have gotton so used to the quality programming and now its gone feel its their rights messed with. Sky are a business and owe us nothing at the end of it. If they felt the Sunday and Monday games were costing them too much they will pull it. Or maybe something else got in their way who knows but at the end of it lets all get of our high horses and stop pretending for one minute sky or the nfl owe us anything.

We truly didnt know how lucky we were with the NFL coverage until it was taken away from us.

Disclaimer: Not aimed at you personally Max but all this Sky owes us bollocks really annoys me. If everyone pulled their contracts with Sky tomorrow and gave the NFL as their reason for doing it maybe then they would take note. But no one has as yet again us and the Brits prove how good we are at moaning about something and not doing anything about it.

To be fair whilst getting rid of Sunday Night Football(simicast on five) and the red button games(an extra cost if even minute), getting rid of Monday Night Football which they showed with both themselves and five(and even HD) makes no sense. I have come to the conclusion that it is because ESPN are the feed and as they have become their competitor(I know its not really competition but Sky don't like other networks on theirs regardless of how close they are). Why show Thursday Night games and not Monday Night ones? They hardly pull in far bigger ratings which it is claimed cost us MNF.

In that sense I think we have been screwed by the various interests.

Max Power1

theres no real other reason for sky to drop the mNF, apart from the ESPN factor.
I dont see how someone cant bid for the rights? Even Channel four ffs

tallaghtoutlaws

Max Power1 wrote: »

theres no real other reason for sky to drop the mNF, apart from the ESPN factor.
I dont see how someone cant bid for the rights? Even Channel four ffs

No real reason? How do you know that? Common sense would say there is no real reason. But without knowing what went on in their meeting and negotiations how can you say that. it could have been purely a business decision who knows. But whatever it was it was enough to get MNF off our screens.

theothers108

sicken this game isnt on tv looked at schedule at start of year this was the big one ,has a chance to be the most watched mnf game ever . I mean all of europe can watch this game and yet the country holdin its 3rd int series game cant show the ****in thing

tallaghtoutlaws

theothers108 wrote: »

sicken this game isnt on tv looked at schedule at start of year this was the big has a chance to be the most watched mnf game ever . I mean all of europe can watch this game and yet the country holdin its 3rd int series game cant show the ****in thing

All of Europe Dont have Sky TV ruling the Roost unfortunately.

Max Power1

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

No real reason? How do you know that? Common sense would say there is no real reason. But without knowing what went on in their meeting and negotiations how can you say that. it could have been purely a business decision who knows. But whatever it was it was enough to get MNF off our screens.

Obviously I can only assume - I am not, after all, privvy to the NFL tv rights negotiation!

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

All of Europe Dont have Sky TV ruling the Roost unfortunately.

Indeed - as far as I am aware ESPN have the rights predominantly in Europe

theothers108

Isnt the Nfl on espn america with Mlb nhl in europe though it was on nasn when i was there few years ago

tallaghtoutlaws

Max Power1 wrote: »

Obviously I can only assume - I am not, after all, privvy to the NFL tv rights negotiation!

Exactly none of us are and until the day someone actually comes out with the reason for it all of it is just mere speculation. Of cousre as I said common sense says there is no reason why Sky shouldnt be showing MNF. But who knows what hair brain idea made them not. If people really wanted to show sky they meant business they would cancel their subscriptions. And I mean everyone who keeps blaming sky. No one forces us to watch it ye know. NFL fans lets all round up and tell Sky to get f*cked that will show them.... Oh no wait I live in Ireland and us and the Brits tend not to think with our feet but sit and complain about it. :D

tallaghtoutlaws

theothers108 wrote: »

Isnt the Nfl on espn america with Mlb nhl in europe though it was on nasn when i was there few years ago

Yes the NFL was on NASN(ESPN America) also outside the UK and Ireland. Sky had exclusive rights for the NFL in the UK and Ireland and kind of still do to some extent.

D3PO

if you only have sky for nfl you should drop the sub and be getting the nfl gamepass. if your using it for other things which most people are like prem league etc then you cant really complain.

sky are a business and will do whats best for them in that regard. i personally loved the sky coverage but what can you do.

and in fairness some of the feeds available online now are great quality ok not hd maybe but more than clear

themont85

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

No real reason? How do you know that? Common sense would say there is no real reason. But without knowing what went on in their meeting and negotiations how can you say that. it could have been purely a business decision who knows. But whatever it was it was enough to get MNF off our screens.

I'm pretty sure they are using the rating excuse, which doesn't really hold up with them showing Thursday Night Games which are lower profile and on at just as awkward a day as a Monday night.

tallaghtoutlaws

themont85 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they are using the rating excuse, which doesn't really hold up with them showing Thursday Night Games which are lower profile and on at just as awkward a day as a Monday night.

Yeah the good old rating excuse, the type of excuse the media throw out there when they are looking for a scapegoat answer as to why something is cancelled and they would rather not say. So easy for any TV company just to put it down to ratings. Saves them an explanation. Do you believe it?

themont85

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

Yeah the good old rating excuse, the type of excuse the media throw out there when they are looking for a scapegoat answer as to why something is cancelled and they would rather not say. So easy for any TV company just to put it down to ratings. Saves them an explanation. Do you believe it?

I don't really know if you are being sarcastic but if ratings were truely an issue with overnight games they wouldn't have Thursday ones. Scheduling isn't one as they have four channels showing sweet FA after 12 apart from the live WWE on Mondays. I don't believe ratings are the reason it isn't being shown if that is what you are asking.

Max Power1

themont85 wrote: »

I don't really know if you are being sarcastic but if ratings were truely an issue with overnight games they wouldn't have Thursday ones. Scheduling isn't one as they have four channels showing sweet FA after 12 apart from the live WWE on Mondays. I don't believe ratings are the reason it isn't being shown if that is what you are asking.

which is why I surmised it must have been a ESPN related decision

Oatesy23

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Nobody is going to show it just because of the whole Brett Favre thing.

No, they should show it because it pits the sports greatest franchise and one of the most popular teams against their neighbours and rivals. The favre thing adds to it. I mean, some channel would show ManU Liverpool in football, if ManU bought Torres it would add an extra angle...

davyjose

Max Power1 wrote: »

which is why I surmised it must have been a ESPN related decision

I think we'll be watching MNF next season, on ESPN. I have no factual basis to go on, but it makes no sense for ESPN not to show this when they own the feed.
Clearly, they'll pull in more viewers than PTI or whatever else is on...

Max Power1

davyjose wrote: »

I think we'll be watching MNF next season, on ESPN. I have no factual basis to go on, but it makes no sense for ESPN not to show this when they own the feed.
Clearly, they'll pull in more viewers than PTI or whatever else is on...

well it makes more sense than no-one showing it!

But I hope its on sky or FTA next year

me-skywalker

Sky is owned by Fox, Sky is now in party with ESPN who bought soccer rights, Sky obviously were exempt from the bidding as ESPN would have lost some games and might have agreed to sell them the hosting rights for the soccer games based on the contract for MNF, through Fox...

LuckyLloyd

I dumped my Sky subscription. The NFL was the main reason I maintained it. All of ye complaining should do the same. There will be some renegotiation of the rights next year. If every NFL fan in Ireland dumped the subscription it would be noticed by them - and might push them to arrange better coverage from next season on.

Yes, we had it very good before. But the jump from what we had to what is currently on offer is massive imo.

I'll tell ye this much in advance: when the playoffs roll around and you are only getting one out of every two games as opposed to the wall to wall coverage ye are used to there will really be some whining going on...

tallaghtoutlaws

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I dumped my Sky subscription. The NFL was the main reason I maintained it. All of ye complaining should do the same. There will be some renegotiation of the rights next year. If every NFL fan in Ireland dumped the subscription it would be noticed by them - and might push them to arrange better coverage from next season on.

Yes, we had it very good before. But the jump from what we had to what is currently on offer is massive imo.

I'll tell ye this much in advance: when the playoffs roll around and you are only getting one out of every two games as opposed to the wall to wall coverage ye are used to there will really be some whining going on...

100% agree. I said the same thing earlier in this thread or another thread. The ony way they will get the message is if both fans in the UK and Ireland offload there subscription and say its because of the NFL.

The Sparrow

I'm so f'n bored hearing that nobody should be complaining and that if you don't like that Sky has dropped MNF that you should drop Sky Sports completely. Fact is the majority of Sky Sports subscribers don't just subscribe for the NFL but for the premier league, rugby, boxing, cricket or whatever as well. So it would be pretty stupid to cancel all that.

There is absolutely no logic to saying that if you are pissed off you should not complain but instead just cancel your subscription. It's like saying that if you are in a restaurant and you just had a really nice starter but the main course comes out missing the meat that instead of complaining and pointing out that the meat is missing so that the restaurant can rectify it and you can enjoy the meal, that you just get up and leave and cancel the whole night.

As far as I'm concerned, SKY are using their dominant position and their money to ensure that they get premium channel exclusivity for the NFL. NFLUK have admitted that exclusivity was a big factor in the negotiations. Without the exclusivity that SKY demanded ESPN could have shown MNF.

ESPN has just signed a UK tv deal the the NBA. You think they wouldn't have taken MNF if Sky hadn't been so insistent on exclusivity?

tallaghtoutlaws

The Sparrow wrote: »

I'm so f'n bored hearing that nobody should be complaining and that if you don't like that Sky has dropped MNF that you should drop Sky Sports completely. Fact is the majority of Sky Sports subscribers don't just subscribe for the NFL but for the premier league, rugby, boxing, cricket or whatever as well. So it would be pretty stupid to cancel all that.

There is absolutely no logic to saying that if you are pissed off you should not complain but instead just cancel your subscription. It's like saying that if you are in a restaurant and you just had a really nice starter but the main course comes out missing the meat that instead of complaining and pointing out that the meat is missing so that the restaurant can rectify it and you can enjoy the meal, that you just get up and leave and cancel the whole night.

As far as I'm concerned, SKY are using their dominant position and their money to ensure that they get premium channel exclusivity for the NFL. NFLUK have admitted that exclusivity was a big factor in the negotiations. Without the exclusivity that SKY demanded ESPN could have shown MNF.

ESPN has just signed a UK tv deal the the NBA. You think they wouldn't have taken MNF if Sky hadn't been so insistent on exclusivity?

You completely missed the point of what Luckylyod was getting at? And I stopped read after your first paragraph. No one said silently cancel anything. The best way to complain is to cancel your subscription if you ONLY have it for NFL and make sure they know its because their NFL coverage is sh1t.

Simple fact is keeping Sky and paying for **** service sends them a message that people still like their service. Having the service and complaining has not yet worked as I know many including myself who sent them letters and called them up complaining. Using the Restaurant analogy fails for the reason that you are in the position to get said missing meat by complaining. In this case Sky wont offer you your meat as its not in the kitchen cooking :rolleyes: So before you contradict yourself again read Lucky's post again.

You pay for a **** service you know fails and you have not taken affirmitive action well then you have lost your right to moan about it. As for those who like the soccer aspect on sky and all the other sports well they still can complain by calling up sky and sending them letters but lets get real where will it get them? nowhere because they are fully committed to other sports also and continue to pay Sky the money that made Sky have the power.

Hazys

No suprise as ESPN stirs the pot for tonights game. The are selectively choosing the words of Brett Farve for the game to incit the fans.

Orginal Quote from Farve "It was 16 great years. I hope they enjoyed it, they appreciated . . . that run as much as I did. You can't take that away. You just have to let it go and just move on."

The aired quote "It was 16 great years. I hope they enjoyed it, they appreciated . . . that run as much as I did. You can't take that away. You just have to let it go"

A sutle change but it does stir the pot a bit more...ESPN are the US version of The Sun. Pity now one of my favourite reporters Mike Reiss now works for them...he's the only reason i use their site after a few years of not clicking onto their site.

themont85

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I dumped my Sky subscription. The NFL was the main reason I maintained it. All of ye complaining should do the same. There will be some renegotiation of the rights next year. If every NFL fan in Ireland dumped the subscription it would be noticed by them - and might push them to arrange better coverage from next season on.

Yes, we had it very good before. But the jump from what we had to what is currently on offer is massive imo.

I'll tell ye this much in advance: when the playoffs roll around and you are only getting one out of every two games as opposed to the wall to wall coverage ye are used to there will really be some whining going on...

Whilst I agree with your sentiment-I myself dumped them and told them why on the phone a week ago-I will have to subscribe again for the playoffs because Sky managed to once again exclusive. I didn't mind this until this year but now they have been allowed to keep the gems whilst giving a crappy service to big fans. NFLUK want people to subscribe to Gamepass yet even at the huge price you don't get all the games and are forced effectively to get Sky as well at least in January. Whoever negotiated the deal from NFLUK got a horrendus deal which has royally screwed the fan.

LuckyLloyd

themont85 wrote: »

Whilst I agree with your sentiment-I myself dumped them and told them why on the phone a week ago-I will have to subscribe again for the playoffs because Sky managed to once again exclusive. I didn't mind this until this year but now they have been allowed to keep the gems whilst giving a crappy service to big fans. NFLUK want people to subscribe to Gamepass yet even at the huge price you don't get all the games and are forced effectively to get Sky as well at least in January. Whoever negotiated the deal from NFLUK got a horrendus deal which has royally screwed the fan.

Switching it back on for the playoffs and dumping it immediately after the superbowl is good too to be fair, you are still sending a clear message by doing that - and hitting them financially at the same time.

The Sparrow

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

You completely missed the point of what Luckylyod was getting at?

I wasn't referencing Luckylyod's post. I was mostly talking about your posts such as:

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

You pay for a **** service you know fails and you have not taken affirmitive action well then you have lost your right to moan about it.

This is an American Football forum for everyone to talk about every aspect of the game. Therefore it seems to me fair game to voice our frustration the lack of tv coverage of the NFL. But everytime somebody mentions it, you regurgitate the same line that if you don't like what Sky have done then cancel the subscription. That is not an option for many people as they either subscribe for other sports, have rubbish broadband access so Gamepass is not on option or they are not the only one in their household who watches Sky.

We get it. In an ideal world everyone would cancel their subscription with Sky but that just isn't realistic.

EDIT: It also doesn't seem that gamepass is a particularly attractive option either:

http://forum.nfluk.com/showthread.php?t=50360

tallaghtoutlaws

The Sparrow wrote: »

I wasn't referencing Luckylyod's post. I was mostly talking about your posts such as:




This is an American Football forum for everyone to talk about every aspect of the game. Therefore it seems to me fair game to voice our frustration the lack of tv coverage of the NFL. But everytime somebody mentions it, you regurgitate the same line that if you don't like what Sky have done then cancel the subscription. That is not an option for many people as they either subscribe for other sports, have rubbish broadband access so Gamepass is not on option or they are not the only one in their household who watches Sky.

We get it. In an ideal world everyone would cancel their subscription with Sky but that just isn't realistic.

As the pot says to the kettle.

Simple fact me saying the same thing you and others works in reverse as we all with our own opinions are sprouting the same BS over and over and hence why its getting old. And no sh1t on it being an American Football forum thanks for reminding me :rolleyes:

But my point to the cancelling thing is SKy know damn well they wont lose subscribers over it so why should they care about MNF. See what Im getting at. Yes the NFL fan is losing out but Sky are still making their money. So rattling on about it and not doing anything about it will never change that fact.

I know a bunch of guys in the UK, 20 of them cancelled their Sky. They are Rugby Soccer and football fans also. So now what they do is meet up every weekend when they can and watch the games together. They adapt to the situation so it is a realistic option if you want it to be.

tallaghtoutlaws

The Sparrow wrote: »

EDIT: It also doesn't seem that gamepass is a particularly attractive option either:

http://forum.nfluk.com/showthread.php?t=50360

I never said it was and in fact i cancelled mine. I now just watch streams personally.

The Sparrow

tallaghtoutlaws wrote: »

And no sh1t on it being an American Football forum thanks for reminding me :rolleyes:

But my point to the cancelling thing is SKy know damn well they wont lose subscribers over it so why should they care about MNF. See what Im getting at.

Yes. I do. I really, really do. You've only made the same point a million times before. I'll give you one thing... at least you are consistent!:p thanks for reminding me:rolleyes:

I never said it was and in fact i cancelled mine.

I never said that you did.

tallaghtoutlaws

The Sparrow wrote: »

Yes. I do. I really, really do. You've only made the same point a million times before. I'll give you one thing... at least you are consistent!:p thanks for reminding me:rolleyes:



I never said that you did.

Consistancy is key :D

me-skywalker

Sky Sports has plenty of other sports than NFL and im sure that the NFL isnt there most watched service especially the late games hence them being the ones cancelled. As for the Red button service im annoyed about this but sure if you only have Sky Sports package for the NFL then fair enough cancel it

but shut up moaning about it god you can watch it for free online!

Sea Devils

Hasn't there been a reduction in live coverage on most of the other Sports shown on Sky?. It seems to me that looking at their listings there are much more highlight shows then before.

So it seems the NFL isn't the only League that has suffered in this regard.